Did Josh Koscheck Have a Point?

Arguing about the controversy of certain post-fight comments has become an activity unto itself for MMA fans these days: it seems that not an event goes by without a fighter making some sort of incendiary statement in the adrenaline-filled moments following an internationally-televised fight.  Of course, that is probably the precise idea behind interviewing participants before they have so much as caught their breath, right?

UFC 106 brought gems from both Tito Ortiz (we all saw that one coming) and Josh Koscheck, who memorably called out supposed number one contender in the welterweight division, Dan Hardy.  Just in case you haven’t heard, Koscheck called out Hardy by saying he hasn’t fought anyone and doesn’t deserve the title shot he’ll be getting from Georges St. Pierre in early 2010.  Hardy, for his part, stood up in the crowd and made the “pouty face” motion, complete with faux tear-wiping action.

Koscheck has since backed off of his statements a bit, perhaps because he sees that no amount of criticism will change the UFC’s immediate plans for the division, or perhaps because saying that a guy who just beat one of your training partners “hasn’t fought anybody” is not such a good idea.  Still, the interview brings up a good question: was Koscheck right in saying that Hardy doesn’t deserve his shot?

Well, yes and no.  In my opinion, it would be best to see the top fighter in the division get the title shot, with little regard to issues such as whether said fighter has already had a title shot in the past against the current champion.  Obviously, the UFC does not do things that way.  Otherwise, Nate Marquardt (or Dan Henderson, had he re-signed by now) would have been named the next challenger for Anderson Silva’s middleweight title.

Also, the UFC is clearly having a hard time finding a solid number one contender in the weight class.  Koscheck, Fitch and Alves are all clearly better fighters than Hardy, but they all have recent losses on their resumes, including Koscheck, who has won just two in a row since the upset loss to Paulo Thiago, and who otherwise would probably be getting a title shot right now.  Swick was on a nice roll where he looked much more impressive than he did against Hardy, and he and Martin Kampmann (who were supposed to face off to decide the top contender) were both undefeated at welterweight, adding a bit of mystique to the equation.

Furthermore, the talent pool in the division, once considered the UFC’s deepest, has thinned out some.  Top contenders who couldn’t break through to the top, such as Sean Sherk and Diego Sanchez, have departed, while veterans like Matt Hughes have fallen from their pedestals.  All of this (and the understandable reluctance of St. Pierre to fight outside of his division, which would give the contenders time to sort themselves out) created a sort of perfect storm, in which a fighter like Hardy could snatch a title shot under circumstances that would normally not warrant it whatsoever.

In the case of Dan Hardy, I find it hard to believe that you can qualify for a title shot in the “Super Bowl of mixed martial arts” with wins against Akihiro Gono, Rory Markham, Marcus Davis and Mike Swick, especially with two of those wins coming by split decision.  In particular, I find it amazing that anyone can get a title shot in the welterweight division without having to face Koscheck, Jon Fitch or Thiago Alves.

Still, it’s clear that the UFC does not want to put one of those three fighters, all whom have done more in the division than Hardy, in there with St. Pierre.  The question is: why?  Sure, we’ve already seen St. Pierre beat those three, but wouldn’t most say that any of them would give GSP a better challenge than Hardy, who poses little threat to GSP whatsoever?

The UFC needs to get over this aversion to repeating title bouts.  With the way that the sport (and the company) is structured, the same few guys will be duking it out at the top for years at a time, and when there is a champion of St. Pierre or Silva’s caliber, it is only natural that they will run through the best fighters.  Why should the challengers not get another shot to do what they didn’t get done the first time?  How far will the UFC take this trend?  Furthermore, how many fights will a guy like Fitch need to win in a row to get another shot, especially considering it took him eight wins to earn his last one?

E-mail Jon Hartley